Social factors and age play a significant role in cervical cancer and advanced-stage disease among Danish women.

BACKGROUND: For cervical cancer (CC), the implementation of preventive strategies has the potential to make cervical cancer occurrence and death largely avoidable. To better understand the factors possibly responsible for cervical cancer, we aimed to examine possible differences in age and social parameters as well as screening status between women with low- or high-stage cervical cancer and matched controls. METHODS: Through the Danish Cancer Registry (DCR), women diagnosed with cervical cancer in Denmark between 1987 and 2016 were included. These were age- and residence-matched in a 1:5 ratio with controls from the general female population. The study population was sub grouped into a low-stage subpopulation with women with early-stage cervical cancer and matched controls and a high-stage subpopulation with women with late-stage cervical cancer and matched controls. Age and social parameters were compared within the subpopulations as well as between low- and high-stage cases. For part of the study population, screening attendance was examined to compare differences in adherence. RESULTS: Overall, we found that the risk of cervical cancer is significantly increased in socially disadvantaged women and not least non-attenders in screening. Interestingly, the high-stage subpopulation was significantly older than the low-stage subpopulation (p < 0.001), and when examining the impact of age further, we found that for cervical cancer cases, the risk of having low-stage disease decreases significantly with increasing age, whereas the risk of having high-stage disease increases significantly with increasing age. In the screening cohort, significantly less cases than controls were attenders in screening with the most pronounced differences seen in the old subpopulation (women aged 50-64 years) and in the high-stage subpopulation (p-values all < 0.001). Interestingly, when examining the risk of CC for attenders and non-attenders, we demonstrated that many social parameters continue to influence the risk of cervical cancer, even in women attending screening. CONCLUSIONS: Older women, socially disadvantaged women, and non-attenders in screening are particularly vulnerable in terms of developing cervical cancer, especially high-stage disease. Therefore, improvements in the participating rate in screening as well as a revision of the current screening guidelines are needed.

Circulating cell-free HPV DNA is a strong marker for disease severity in cervical cancer.

For cervical cancer (CC), circulating cell-free HPV DNA (ccfHPV) may establish disease severity. Furthermore, HPV integration has been correlated to viral load and survival. In this study, pre-treatment plasma from 139 CC cases (50 primary surgery patients, 22 primary surgery + adjuvant oncological therapy patients, and 67 primary oncological therapy patients) was collected (2018-2020). Furthermore, plasma from 25 cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 patients and 15 healthy women (negative controls) were collected. Two next-generation sequencing (NGS) panels were used to establish ccfHPV presence and human papillomavirus type 16 (HPV16) integration status. ccfHPV was detected in four primary surgery (8.0%), eight primary surgery + adjuvant oncology (36.4%), and 54 primary oncology (80.6%) patients. For primary oncology patients with HPV16-related cancer (n = 37), more ccfHPVneg than ccfHPVpos patients had HPV16 integration (P = 0.04), and in patients with HPV16 integration (n = 13), ccfHPVpos patients had higher disease stages than ccfHPVneg patients (P = 0.05). In summary, ccfHPV presence is related to disease severity and may add to the debated Sedlis criteria used for identifying patients for adjuvant oncological therapy. However, ccfHPV detection is influenced by HPV integration status and disease stage, and these factors need to be considered in ccfHPVneg patients.

The Diagnostic Value of Circulating Cell-Free HPV DNA in Plasma from Cervical Cancer Patients.

Circulating cell-free HPV DNA (ccfHPV DNA) may serve as a marker for cervical cancer. In this study, we used digital droplet PCR (ddPCR) to detect and quantify ccfHPV DNA in plasma from patients with HPV16- or HPV18-associated cervical cancer. Blood samples from 60 patients diagnosed with cervical cancer (FIGO IA1-IVA) at Aarhus or Odense University Hospital (June 2018 to March 2020) were collected prior to treatment, and patients were subdivided into an early stage (n = 30) and a late-stage subgroup (n = 30) according to disease stage. Furthermore, blood samples from eight women with HPV16- or 18-associated premalignant conditions (CIN3), and 15 healthy controls were collected. ddPCR was used to analyze plasma from all participants. ccfHPV DNA was detected in 19 late-stage patients (63.33%), 3 early stage patients (10.00%), and none of the CIN3 patients or controls. Quantitative evaluation showed significant correlations between ccfHPV DNA level and stage, tumor score, and tumor size. Thus, our results indicate that ccfHPV DNA may not be a useful marker for early detection of cervical cancer. However, for patients with advanced stage cervical cancer, ccfHPV DNA level represents a promising tool to establish tumor burden, making it useful for establishing treatment response and monitoring the disease.

Targeted Next Generation Sequencing for Human Papillomavirus Genotyping in Cervical Liquid-Based Cytology Samples.

At present, human papillomavirus (HPV) testing is replacing morphology-based cytology as the primary tool for cervical cancer screening in several countries. However, the HPV assays approved for screening lack detection for all but one of the possibly carcinogenic HPV types and do not genotype all included HPV types. This study demonstrates the use of a targeted HPV next generation sequencing (NGS) panel to detect and genotype all 25 carcinogenic, probably carcinogenic, and possibly carcinogenic HPV types as well as the low-risk types HPV6 and HPV11. The panel was validated using a cohort of 93 paired liquid-based cytology samples (general practitioner (GP)-collected cervical samples and cervico-vaginal self-samples (SS)). Overall, the targeted panel had a sensitivity (GP = 97.7%, SS = 92.1%) and specificity (GP = 98.0%, SS = 96.4%) similar to the commercial HPV assays, Cobas® 4800 HPV DNA test (Roche) and CLART® HPV4S assay (GENOMICA). Interestingly, of the samples that tested positive with the NGS panel, three (6.4%) of the GP-collected samples and four (9.1%) of the self-samples tested positive exclusively for HPV types only included in the NGS panel. Thus, targeted HPV sequencing has great potential to improve the HPV screening programs since, as shown here, it can identify additional HPV positive cases, cases with HPV integration, variants in the HPV genome, and which HPV type is dominant in multi-infected cases.

Evidence of No Association Between Human Papillomavirus and Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Globally, breast cancer is the most frequent cancer among women. Studies reported an increased risk of breast cancer among women with prior cervical dysplasia. This study aimed to describe the prevalence of human papillomavirus (HPV) in breast cancer and explore if women with prior cervical neoplasia carry an increased risk of HPV-positive breast cancer compared to women without. METHODS: This case-control study identified 193 Danish women diagnosed with breast cancer (1998-2012) at Aarhus University Hospital or Copenhagen University Hospital Herlev. Cases were 93 women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or worse (CIN3+) prior to breast cancer. Controls were 100 women without prior cervical dysplasia. HPV testing and genotyping were done using SPF10 PCR-DEIA-LiPA25 and an in-house semi-Q-PCR assay. RESULTS: Overall HPV prevalence in breast cancer for the assays was 1.55% (95% CI 0.32-4.48) and 0.52% (95% CI 0.01-2.85). There was no difference in HPV prevalence between cases and controls (2.15 vs. 1.00%, p = 0.61 and 1.08 vs. 0.00%, p = 0.48). HPV prevalence in CIN3+ was 94.62% (95% CI 0.88-0.98). Concordance between the assays was 98.60%. CONCLUSION: HPV prevalence in breast cancer is very low suggesting no etiological correlation between HPV and breast cancer.